Science and Research Committee on April 11th, 2024

[The Chair, Liberal, Lloyd Longfield]

Thank you very much for a great round of questions.

Now we'll move to Arielle Kayabaga from the Liberals for six minutes.

[Arielle Kayabaga, Liberal, London West, ON]

Thank you, Chair.

I want to welcome our witnesses to this very important study and give a personal shout-out to Western University in London.

I am very happy to have you join us to help us understand a bit more about research, especially with the lens of southwestern Ontario, Western being one of the U15 universities. There's also the collaboration you have within the region.

Welcome to the committee. I'll get right to it.

As I understand, funding is allocated to universities through a quota. Could you share with the committee a bit more about what the allocation is per university and how you understand it is decided? For example, is it by student population, amount of published research, etc., or is there any other factor you may consider to be a criterion that allows you to get that funding?

[Dr. Penny Pexman]

Arielle, is this for me?

[Arielle Kayabaga, Liberal, London West, ON]

Yes. I'm sorry.

[Dr. Penny Pexman]

That's okay.

Regarding funding, “quota” is probably not quite the right term. There is a peer-reviewed funding competition. All scholars submit applications. There are panels put together of researchers who have content matter expertise. Those researchers are from small, medium-size and large institutions. International scholars are invited to be part of those panels. There are also members of industry and organizations on those panels. They decide which research looks the most promising and is most deserving of funding.

That's how decisions are made about the funding flows. How many students we have at Western doesn't determine how many federal grant funding dollars we get.

[Arielle Kayabaga, Liberal, London West, ON]

How does the institution help researchers complete administrative work related to a funding application, and to what extent does this red tape impact the university's capacity to do research? What can the federal government do to help the process be better for the granting agencies in order to ease the burden?

Maybe Mr. McCauley can answer the same questions as well. I'll hear from you, then from Mr. McCauley.

[Dr. Penny Pexman]

There is a considerable administrative burden and it is not getting easier to apply for grant funding. Part of that is because we want to do better and better research, and there are more and more elements we need to consider as we do that work. Largely, what the vice-president of the research office does at an institution is to support researchers in applying for those grants, meeting the expectations of the grant funding programs and ensuring good applications go out the door. I think it's a challenge for every institution to mount that kind of support.

[Dr. Edward McCauley]

What all of our institutions try to do, both small and large, is give the scholars as much time as possible to create new ideas and then to create new proposals. Many of us work in the background to try to ensure effective and efficient administration of those grant proposals, including by encouraging peer review within our institution and among other institutions—even before the proposal goes to the grant council—because that improves proposals and leads to success.

However, this is a significant burden. Universities across the country collaborate in that burden with joint proposals. Large institutions help out smaller institutions given their capacity because we all want success.

[Arielle Kayabaga, Liberal, London West, ON]

Mr. McCauley, could I extend to you the same question that I asked earlier? What are your views around the criteria used to allocate funding? Would you say they are similar to what Ms. Pexman said, or are there divergent views?

[Dr. Edward McCauley]

I agree with Dr. Pexman.

Quotas are not the way to look at it. It's a merit-based program or a variety of different programs that individuals, collectives of individuals, collaboratives and partners can apply for. The key thing there is the piece on excellence, on merit-based approaches to evaluating those proposals, and having a clear set of guidelines on submission.

I've been very fortunate to live in different jurisdictions and have grants from different organizations around the world. The support staff at the tri-councils and CFI do an amazing job at ensuring there's no bias in those proposal evaluations. They're just incredible.

[Arielle Kayabaga, Liberal, London West, ON]

I will go Dr. Wagner. If any of the institutions here feel compelled to answer, they can also answer.

You talked about indigenous research. I'm interested to know about research funding for specific minority groups, whether they're indigenous communities, francophones or other groups that are perceived to have a minority language or be in a minority community. Can you touch a little on that and the challenges that you're facing in supporting researchers of those minority groups?

[The Chair, Liberal, Lloyd Longfield]

You have 30 seconds.

[Dr. Shannon Wagner]

Let me start by saying that I want to echo and acknowledge the points put forward by my colleagues Dr. Pexman and Dr. McCauley. It's really a process of funding the system and ensuring that we're able to provide funding across all of the different priorities, including faculty research, student research and research in indigenous and other specific priority areas.

Thinking about moving forward with respect to merit-based systems and excellence is really about considering what components make up a merit-based and excellence system. That feeds into your question around how we support specific priorities, like indigenous research.

As Dr. McCauley has alluded to, the tri-council has been fantastic about providing specific calls, for example, that support that kind of research and research into specific priorities—

[The Chair, Liberal, Lloyd Longfield]

We're over time.

Thank you for getting those thoughts in. Maybe we can work more into other questions.

Now we'll go to Mr. Blanchette-Joncas for six minutes.

[Maxime Blanchette-Joncas, Bloc, Rimouski-Neigette—Témiscouata—Les Basques, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I would like to welcome the witnesses who have joined us today for this important study.

Ms. Wagner, from Thompson Rivers University, your colleague from the University of Calgary said earlier that the issue wasn't necessarily the distribution of funding, but rather underfunding. In our latest study, we learned that 79% of funding goes to Canada's 15 largest universities. I would like to hear your thoughts on this information.

As a representative of a university that isn't one of the 15 largest in Canada, do you think that equity and access to funding for small and medium‑sized universities constitute a real issue?

[Dr. Shannon Wagner]

This goes back to our opening remarks, including those made by Dr. McCauley and the five points that were brought up by Dr. Pexman around increasing the funding going into the system.

Right now, there's not enough to go around, so we end up seeing competition between institutions—things we don't want to see. We want to see collaboration between institutions. We want to see the opportunities that Dr. McCauley was talking about earlier. We want to see teams working together. We want to see interinstitutional faculty membership coming together to solve some of most pressing problems.

In order to do that, we have to have opportunities for students and faculty researchers to access granting funds at the federal level. It's really a process of lifting all boats. It's not about providing to one versus the other. It's about providing to the system so that we can work together to do really excellent work and solve the nation's problems.

[Maxime Blanchette-Joncas, Bloc, Rimouski-Neigette—Témiscouata—Les Basques, QC]

Thank you for this information.

Your university has more students than some of the 15 largest universities in Canada. However, you aren't part of this group when it comes to research intensity or access to funding. Given the significant and objective finding that your university has more students enrolled than other institutions, but receives less funding, how do you feel about the current structure of research funding in Canada?

[Dr. Shannon Wagner]

On this question, I would reflect back on Dr. Pexman's comments about how there is no real quota with respect to tri-council funding. It's not based on the number of students that we have as an institution. It's really based on the applications that are put forward by the researchers within our institutions. It's about providing a supportive system where our faculty researchers can put forward the highest quality applications to the tri-council to be funded and do work. It isn't reflected in the number of students. It's reflected in the quality of the applications and the research support.

As Dr. Pexman indicated, the VPR's office is often research services support. That's our reason for being: to support faculty in doing really excellent applications. It's really a reflection of the great faculty work and the support that can be provided through the research services within the institution. That leads to the success of the applications.

[Maxime Blanchette-Joncas, Bloc, Rimouski-Neigette—Témiscouata—Les Basques, QC]

Thank you, Ms. Wagner. I completely agree with you that merit should be recognized and rewarded. However, when we look at, for example, the Canada Research Chairs' allocation process, we see that the process is based on an analysis of the research funding awarded to universities over the past three fiscal years. This allocation process is reviewed every five years. As a result, a university without a significant research history can't access funding.

I would like to hear your thoughts on this. How do small and medium‑sized universities that don't have an exemplary funding history manage to obtain funding in order to make their mark and compete with the large universities, in particular the 15 largest universities in Canada, which receive 79% of all research funding in the country?

[Dr. Shannon Wagner]

That's an excellent question. It really goes back to my opening remarks.

There are opportunities for us to increase the system and create specific programs that might benefit smaller institutions where it is a little harder to break in. Smaller or mid-size institutions like ours are oftentimes looking at recruitment from, for example, mid-career researchers or individuals who are coming in from practice—individuals with long histories in health, for example, who become health researchers. They don't necessarily have significant funding successes from their previous experiences to build upon.

We're thinking about ways we can bring into the system researchers who are new to the system or who have not yet had an experience in the system. We don't want to make the assumption that just because you haven't had an opportunity to access the system, you don't have a great idea. We're trying to be creative about how to provide avenues for faculty researchers and great minds to enter the system in new ways that we haven't thought of before.

[Maxime Blanchette-Joncas, Bloc, Rimouski-Neigette—Témiscouata—Les Basques, QC]

Thank you.

I would like to talk about a situation that came up at our last meeting on this topic. Some people, including Philip Landon, said—

[The Chair, Liberal, Lloyd Longfield]

I'm sorry. We'll have to pause now because we are at time, but I know you'll get an opportunity in the next round.

Mr. Boulerice, welcome. It's good to have you as part of our committee today subbing for Mr. Cannings.

You have six minutes, please.

[Alexandre Boulerice, NDP, Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I'm also pleased to be here today. When my colleague, Mr. Cannings, asked for a replacement because he had other commitments, I gladly volunteered. I believe in the fundamental importance of research for the advancement of human knowledge, for economic development and for the opportunity to adopt public policies based on facts, science and research too. This also helps us with our work.

Ms. Wagner, I'll continue along the same lines as my Bloc Québécois colleague. You talked about equity in Canada's research ecosystem and about how our approach should focus on the democratization of access to funding. You spoke in particular about the possibility that a perhaps smaller institution, which has never done research in a given field or on a given topic, could also access research funding, even if it were for the first time.

It reminds me a bit of young people who want to enter the job market, but who need to already have experience, just when they're trying to enter the job market. Even without experience, they can be extremely competent and able to contribute to the company.

How should this approach work? Should funding be earmarked for these new initiatives, projects and fields of research? Should more general criteria be applied? You talked about approaching this issue creatively rather than systematically denying access to funding. I would like you to elaborate on that. How could this be done?

[Dr. Shannon Wagner]

That's an excellent question.

Lots of different opportunities could be put forward to start to address some of those pieces. Some of the ideas we've come up with to this point think about how the scoring system works within the tri-council. Is it most appropriate to put a lot of weight on, for example, previous funding success? There may be some situations when that is entirely appropriate. I'm not suggesting that's not the case.

We see opportunities for career researchers, for example, which get at exactly what you've referenced with a new employee trying to enter the workforce. You need experience to get experience. It equates to the same sort of approach.

Could we look at similar kinds of approaches for individuals who perhaps have great ideas and haven't yet been able to break into that system? Are there opportunities to create special calls or special opportunities that allow individuals who need experience to get experience and become a participant in the system?

[Alexandre Boulerice, NDP, Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie, QC]

If you don't mind, Ms. Wagner, I'll continue with you before turning to the other important guests here, simply because your university is renowned for its forest fire research.

Last summer, we saw how badly a number of areas of the country were affected by forest fires resulting from the climate crisis and climate change. The fear is that this summer will be worse than the last. Forest fires have already started in Quebec. We also know that the snow pack in British Columbia is insufficient and that there may be an extremely dry season ahead.

How much federal funding is allocated to forest fire research? Is it enough? How could this research actually help the communities of our country protect residents from this phenomenon that, unfortunately, is likely to become worse?